Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
William A. Hadden et al., Respondents, v. Jeremiah W. Dimick, Appellant, 1872 — 48 N.Y. 661 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
William A. Hadden et al., Respondents, v. Jeremiah W. Dimick, Appellant
48 N.Y. 661·New York Commission of Appeals·1872·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
William A. Hadden et al., Respondents, v. Jeremiah W. Dimick, Appellant.
(Argued September 21, 1871;
decided January term, 1872.)
Action to recover damages for breach of contract. Yer-dict ordered by the court for plaintiffs. Reversed upon the ground that there was some evidence tending to show a parol waiver of the contract by plaintiffs, which should have been submitted to the jury; and, if they found such waiver, plaintiffs would be estopped from claiming a non-performance.
William G. Ohoate for the appellant.
John Blosson for the respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Earl, C., reads for reversal.
All concur ; Leonard, 0., not sitting.
Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event.